TABLE 8.1 Conceptions of Modernity: Essential Processes As Viewed by Major Contributors

150 After Parsons TABLE 8.1 Conceptions of Modernity: Essential Processes as Viewed by Major Contributors Differentiation Social- Functional Individual Unification Equalization Disciplining Rationalization Locus Smith, Simmel, On Tocqueville, Tocqueville, Weber, Comte, classicus Wealth of Social Dif- Ancien Democracy Protestant Positive Nations ferentiation Régime in America Ethic Philosophy Other Comte Durkheim Comte Hegel Freud Hegel, Weber contributors Spencer Thomas Elias Durkheim Mannheim Simmel Durkheim Redfield Geertz Weber Elias Mannheim Marx Eisenstadt Bendix Ortega y Bendix Riesman Apter Gasset Gorski Black Marshall Bell Source: Author’s compilation. Modernity as Functional Specialization Theorists of modernity have used the notion of differentiation at least three different ways. Ini- tially it connoted the division of labor in production and exchange. Later it came to signify the separation of different institutional sectors or spheres of action from one another. In addition it came to designate the process whereby individuals become increasingly distinct and unlike one another, called “individuation” (discussed in a later section). The division of labor figures as perhaps the most frequently defined marker of the modern order. Adam Smith, arguably the founding father of modernity theory, centered it in the char- acteristics of what he called commercial society. These properties were twofold: a remarkable improvement in the dexterity of productive labor, and the extension of opportunities to exchange the products of that labor through a monetarized market. Behind all this was an extended process of division of labor. Specialization in production was not planned, but evolved spontaneously as individual producers came to see the benefit of exploiting an advantageous position, however it was attained, in a system of exchange. The idea of the division of labor was developed more or less continuously by the major theorists of modernity. Comte analyzed ways in which the division of labor promotes coopera- tive endeavors and societal stability, and considered the division of labor in the sciences as well as in industry.6 Marx advanced the analysis by distinguishing between the division of labor in society at large, which he described as arising spontaneously through a series of historical stages, and division of labor in the industrial workplace, which he saw as centrally planned and forcibly instituted for the sake of competitive advantage. Spencer generalized the concept into a cosmic process of increasing complexification, from incoherent homogeneity to coherent heterogene- ity. Standing nimbly on Smith’s shoulders, Spencer celebrated the growth of functional specialization in the modern economy and extended its scope to include the differentiation of political and ecclesiastical structures. Durkheim famously focused on the division of labor in his first major monograph, extending Comte’s notions about the solidaristic effects of functional specialization. In this century, most theorists of modernization have included some reference to functional specialization as a key principle of the modern socioeconomic order. In our own time, Niklas Luhmann has insisted that functional differentiation must serve as the master concept for Modernity 155 TABLE 8.2 The “Revolutions” and the Benefits of Modernity Differentiation Social- Cultural Key Process Functional Individual Unificationa Equalizationa Disciplining Rationalization Associated Industrial Integrative Social Disciplinary Academic revolution Revolution revolution revolution revolution revolution (Geertz) (Fararo) (Gorski) (Jencks and Riesman) Adaptive Goods and Freedom Collective Justice Civility Knowledge benefits services efficacy Source: Author’s compilation. aWhat is often called the democratic revolution consists of a combination of both of these processes. arts, sciences, technology, and standard of living, though he denied that any of these benefits possessed a moral nature. The benefits of political unification were also hailed by a number of theorists of modernity. These included pacification of territories under the command of a single regime, the ability to mobilize citizenries to combat disasters from nature or attacks from outside powers, and the provision of greater benefits to all within its boundaries. The movement toward hegemony of universalistic norms has had many benefits. Among these benefits Tocqueville included the accessibility of primary education to all, the enhanced productivity that comes from the promise of mobility, the diminution of warlike passions from eliminating stratification based on honor, and the toleration of diverse religions. As Durkheim foresaw, securing the rights of previously disadvantaged groups has promoted social harmony. Equalization under the law led to a more contented populace as well as to a sense of living in a more just society. Despite his misgivings about equalization, Ortega y Gasset observed that extending rights and resources to more of the population was a change that promoted vital energies and vastly increased human possibilities. The benefits of discipline included the capacity of citizens to live together in a civil manner as well as the ability to perform occupational tasks on a regular and reliable basis. Many authors (Weber, Mannheim, Bendix, Philip Gorski) have found modern industrial labor and bureau- cratic work to be dependent on new levels of self-discipline. Elias has found this essential for people to get along in situations of dense interaction, and Freud considered such self-control generically important for the achievements of civilization. Others, however, have found the new levels of self-control to be intrinsically valuable; thus, Weber considered the formation of gen- uine personality through ethical regulation of daily conduct to be a beneficial outcome of the spirit that ushered in the era of modern capitalism (Hennis 1988). The benefits of rationalized culture are similarly both instrumental and intrinsically valuable. From the Enlightenment onward, the enlargement of a knowledge base has been hailed as a crucial resource for enhancing human well-being. This includes both the development of bodies of codified knowledge and the spread of techniques for improved cognition. Modern consumers came to expect continuous improvements in commodities of all sorts thanks to new kinds of validated knowledge. Beyond that, the very existence of bodies of works rep- resenting an uninhibited quest for truth has been taken as a key feature of civilization (White- head 1933). 156 After Parsons The Discontents of Modernity From the onset of the modernizing revolutions, a host of discontents have been associated with the division of labor and its effects in the modern occupational and market systems (see table 8.3). Intense specialization in industrial production elicited critiques about the dehumanizing consequences of such work. Repetition of simple operations was said to make workers “as stu- pid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to become” and the dexterity thus acquired to come “at the expense of [a person’s] intellectual, social, and martial virtues.” The hegemony of commerce created a society in which, as Smith further put it, “every man . becomes in some measure a merchant”—with the attendant calculating, profit-oriented habits of mind (Smith 1776/1976, volume 2, 303; volume 1, 26).9 The monetarization of exchange, in Sim- mel’s analysis, has led to the reduction of all personal and aesthetic values to cash values and the conversion of what was original a means into an absolute end. Proliferation of consumable products elevated consumerism to a dominant place in life. The economic system that lay behind all these developments was faulted by Marx and his followers for a number of noxious effects. These include a base line of chronic unemployment, the instability of cyclical booms and busts in the economy, growing inequality between the top and bottom levels of the income hierarchy, and fragmentation of the community into a plethora of narrow economic interests. Individuation has also been associated with a number of modern ills, including swollen suicide rates (Durkheim), increased loneliness and anxiety (Slater 1976), and reduced public engagement (Sennett 1998) and social capital (Putnam 2000). Drawing together certain strands of this type of analysis, Fred Weinstein and Gerald Platt (1969) scrutinized common psychological reactions to the individual’s emancipation from traditional, hierarchical authority. In particular, they argue, for most of human history “the mod- els for ego endeavor did not include autonomous initiative, and for centuries there were no sys- tematic demands for personal and social autonomy” (Weinstein and Platt 1969, 197). The uniquely modern wish to be free has generated a good deal of guilt and anxiety, leading to regressive solutions that take violent forms; these include the revolutionary imposition of new values in excessive and polarized fashion, and the radical enforcement of a return to traditional values (1969, 38–42). Transformations associated with political democratization entailed other disadvantages. Enfranchisement of the masses led to less informed policy decisions. It caused vulnerability to TABLE 8.3 The Modern Revolutions and their Associated Discontents Differentiation Social- Cultural Process Functional Individual Unification Equalization Disciplining Rationalization Revolution Industrial Integrative Social Disciplinary Academic Benefits

Load more